Customer Reviews

In the Company of Men [VHS]

5 star:		(47)
4 star:		(35)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(16)

 

 

Why is Chad so frightening? Because Society is full of Chads. Around every corner there is some version of Chad: a cruel, unscrupulous, good-looking, highly intelligent person along his lines, who will not only NOT get what's coming to him, but through guile, hypocrisy and ruthlessness rise and devour. In addition, elements of Chad exist in almost everyone, male or female, which if given a chance to operate without personal cost, will always tend to assert themselves to RULE and EXPLOIT the weak.

In a Hollywood movie Chad would've ended up ruined for his evil deeds while the Hollywood Chads behind the scenes collected a fat profit laughing their heads off at the naivete of the public. In LaButte's Indie film Chad gets it all, beautiful woman, position and sadistic kicks without any personal cost whatever.

"In the Company of Men" is not a 'great' film by any means, but an especially important one nevertheless. LaButte and Eckhart's fully realized `white collar' villain commemorates, for easier identification, the readily sensed but rather vague `evil techniques' of countless Chad-type predators throughout society. Future victims of Chads now possess a secret weapon; and not only that, the Chadlike elements present within every person will, for anyone who has seen this film, find it harder to assert themselves without complex and ever more evasive rationalizations.

This film is so frightening because one can imagine these things actually happening. I needed to watch the film twice before I got it all. Basically, two corporate men decide to date a wallflower for six weeks and then dump her, breaking her heart in the most cruel way, essentially getting revenge on all of womankind for past wrongs. In this case, the wallflower is a deaf girl who is a typist in a very bleak corporate office the two men are sent to work in for six weeks. This film is so cleverly written that there were moments (the first time I watched it) when I felt that Chad (the handsome one) was actually falling for this poor girl but at the end, and then on the second viewing, I realized that he was just planting the idea that he might really have feelings for this girl in his co-worker's mind in order to manipulate him (that would be Howard - the less handsome one). Making Howard believe that he might really have feelings for this deaf woman only made her more desirable (to Howard) - male competition in play. I also felt that he was trying to undermine Howard's authority as his boss because of his jealousy - needing to sabotage that aspect as well. Though some elements of the film are cliche (the girl falls for the good-looking one of course, then the nerdy one has a breakdown), these things, again, actually happen in real life (I know a lot of women who would choose a macho handsome guy over a sensitive nerdy guy just on looks alone - the same as a man picking a beautiful woman with a so-so personality over an average-looking woman who is really smart). Though most viewers feel really bad for this woman, she actually played her own game by dating both men simultaneously even after telling Chad that she loved him. She reasons that after not dating for a long time, she liked the attention - it made her feel attractive again. Some people feel bad for Howard but really, he wasn't in love with this girl either though he may have thought so - it was just beating Chad (and being on the rebound) that drove his competitive side to move forward so aggressively. I mean, after dating her for a few weeks, he gives her a used engagement ring and then freaks out telling her that it was all a game when she rejects him. If he really loved and wanted her, he would have tried to protect her from the truth (instead, he uses it as a weapon against her almost as if he is punishing her for the way his former fiance treated him. It seemed to me that he was subconsciouly getting revenge on his former fiance through this woman - that she had in essence become the fiance that rejected him and so the game actually did what it set out to do). Theories like "what goes around comes around" don't apply here and the most disturbing thing about this movie is the reality that what goes around doesn't always come around especially in Chad's case - that he lies, plots, schemes and destroys with no repercussions. In the end, he goes home to his beautiful apartment, his beautiful girlfriend, his great job and everything is as it ever was. And sadly, that's real life.

There's a reason that "In the Company of Men", a low budget independent film, the first from writer-director Neil Labute, won an award at the Sundance Film Festival. The reason is not that it is an enjoyable film, but rather that LaBute demonstrates what so few filmmakers are willing to achieve: that film can be art, and not everybody is supposed to understand or like what you are saying.

LaBute captures the self-absorption and resulting cruelty that EVERY alpha male raised in a fraternal corporate environment ever subscribed to - all roled into the unforgettable character of Chad. Using his persuasive skills to get his boss, Howard (Matt Malloy) to go along in this exercise of cruelty, Chad plays the game to the max. Along the way the audience gets the feel for the impersonable, alien corporate environment and good old boy atmosphere so recognizable in the U.S. Chad is portrayed instinctively by young actor Aaron Eckhart, who has traveled with LaBute through this and all subsequent films, sometimes in minor character roles. Eckhart and LaBute obviously have their pacing and teamwork together - Eckhart portrays Chad effortlessly!

LaBute should be congratulated for not allowing "the happy ending", instead twisting his conclusion to find yet another villainous side of Chad.

The DVD is dark, with few special features, and since almost all of the film takes place indoors (an early LaBute signature), the darkness of the tale is heightened by the appearance of the film. Striking out as a writer/director with a "different voice" (ala John Sayles) LaBute made his mark with "In the Company of Men" - and it is a fascinating study for serious film watchers.

Apparently, this film got under a lot of people's skin. Perhaps this film, written and directed by Neil LaBute, about two corporate cowboys who romantically set up a young deaf woman just to cruelly reject her hits too close to home. It's about the way our drives for power and influence, stymied and constrained within institutional boundaries, become corrupted and petty. In a world where there are no values except success and power is its own end, LaBute seems to be saying, friendship and love turn into manipulative tools. And what's truly ghastly about the film (and what makes it such a success), is that the emotional destruction of the woman is a kind of achievement when you see the world in those terms. The denouement is one of the most effective in years simply for the amount of callousness and pain mixed into it. Eckhardt gives a fantastic performance - he's so absolutely repellent, so shallow and mercenary, that you can't look away from him. Stacy Edwards is also very affecting as the deaf woman the two men set up - her sympathetic portrayal belies the claim that the film is misogynistic. LaBute is a bit too one-dimensional in his intentions - these monsters have no dimensions between their pleasure in their own manipulative abilties although Eckhardt's friend does occaissonally submerge himself in remorse. Yet, few films have so successfully penetrated into the psychology of corporate life and its frustrations. "In the Company of Men" is a dark comedy about one man passing his poisioned chalice on to those around him and I wonder if many of this film's detractors found the cup a bit too bitter

Heading through an airport on their way to a six-week work assignment, two junior executives in an unspecified business discover that they have both been dumped by their girlfriends. After commiserating about the heartlessness of women, the studlier of the pair (Eckhart) suggests, "Let's hurt somebody."

His proposal: While in the unnamed town, where they're headed for business, they find some vulnerable young woman and both begin to court her. They will sweep her off her feet and then, just before leaving town, each will dump her. "It'll be a little payback on all this messy relationship stuff we're dealing with," Eckhart explains. His colleague (Malloy), though a step above Eckhart on the corporate ladder and therefore supposedly wiser, readily agrees to this sordid scenario.

Their plan becomes even more repugnant when they zero in on a potential target: a lovely deaf secretary (Edwards). And so goes this most chilling film. In the Company of Men, an impressive debut movie by writer-director Neil LaBute, is a provocative look at male gamesmanship that raises as many questions about its characters as it answers.

After seeing Men (which deservedly was named best dramatic film by La Bute's fellow filmmakers at Sundance Film Festival), either you will stay up half the night discussing it, or you will find the story so profoundly disturbing that you will feel too wrung out to talk about it at all.

Men features strong performances by its trio of relative newcomers, particularly Eckhart, whose potent leading-man charm proves all the more disturbing when it becomes clear what a manipulatively malevolent knave he is and just who his real target is. And Edwards (TV's Santa Barbara), who is not deaf in real life, is both radiant and heartbreaking as a woman who blossoms under the sudden attention of two seemingly ardent swains.

This movie is not just about the whole idea of the 'alpha male' that Chad emulates or misogyny. It is not a representation of the cutthroatness of the workplace. Granted, these are all surface themes. Underneath that surface, however, one can start to recognize the major themes of the film: evil, appearance vs. reality, and others. These, however, are the main ones that I will discuss. I first saw this movie in my English class, as my teacher showed to us as a parallel to Shakespeare's Othello (not that the movie was spawned of the play, but that the stories are remarkably similar). Throughout the movie, it becomes more and more apparent how Chad is the second coming of Iago: he lacks power, so he uses others with less social status (Othello, the moor, and here, Christine, the deaf girl), employing a fool (Roderigo/Howard) whom he tricks into doing his dirty work, then using the results of the plot to his own advantage. The only difference I see is that, while Iago is apprehended and most likely punished after the end of Othello, Chad comes away from the plot entirely unscathed. Both are cruel, unfeeling men who display a false facade in order to gain the trust of others, and then abuse that trust for their own benefits. So, in essence, the movie is more of an exploration into the nature of evil: how it attracts the weak, tramples the helpless, and benefits those with the gall to use or even BE it. An excellent movie.

One unforgettable quote:
"I don't trust anything that bleeds for a week and doesn't die." - Chad

Sorry, that just had me rolling on the floor in laughter...

I came away from watching this video thinking, God help us if the characters in this movie are typical of real men. This movie shows human nature at its ugliest. The scene where Chad dumps Christine gave me chills, likewise the scene where Chad reveals the truth to Howard. The acting by all three leads was incredible. I can see that this movie would not appeal to a lot of people, and I don't think I would recommend it to many of my friends, but I thought it was definitely worthwhile.

In the Company of Men is a strikingly original and intelligent film. As others have commented, the set design is thin, and the cinematography stark and, at times, a little bland, but these factors only provide a less obtrusive background for the real forces present on screen - dazzling peformances and a biting, at times hilarious, and at times heartbreaking, script. Eckhart's performance is sensational. He portrays a truly evil man of a frightening variety - he is not an idealogue, nor does he even care about committing cruel acts in the presence of an audience. He inflicts cruelty for very personal satisfaction. In fact, Eckhart is so good that you begin to question the real motives behind is behavior, and this ambiguity makes his final act with his victim even more troubling. Stacy Edwards is excellent as the victim, and, unlike a reviewer below, I found her both beautiful and strong. She is treated abhorrently, and the scene where she realizes the truth is searing, but she is a surivor, and a redemptive figure. Her treatment by Eckhart is all the more foreign because she is a wonderful, attractive person whose disability, which induces the practical joke in the first place, seems irrelevant, and even a source of unique strength by the film's end. Matt Malloy does well as the dupe - a man who has a few shreds of decency left under a coat of acceptance-seeking-at-any-cost fibers. He loses something that he can never recover in exchange for a few scraps of false manhood. The torture he feels by the film's end is achingly immediate, yet it is impossible to sympathize with or even pity him. This movie makes you think, and, if you watch it with others, debate. It is multi-layered, and, although not a thriller in the traditional sense, has more than enough emotional twists. Fantastic.

This is a deceptive tale from the corporate jungle. Chad (Aaron Eckhart) is a virile, handsome middle level manager capable of some charm. However he doesn't relate to other people the way most people do. He has some superficial tricks for getting close. He tells women he likes the way they smell. He knows they love that. He bonds with men by appealing to their prejudices. He tells sexist jokes: "What's the difference between a golf ball and a G-spot?" Answer: "I can spend twenty minutes looking for a golf ball." He likes to get close to people to use and exploit them. But he goes further than that. He likes to hurt them. Why? "Because I can," he says.

In other words, Chad's a sociopath who specializes in humiliating people. He gets a black worker to expose himself. He says he needs to see if he really has the stuff to be recommended for a promotion. He tells him, the guy who wins is the guy who has "the nastiest sack of venom." In case the guy doesn't know he's been humiliated, as he pulls up his pants, Chad tells him to get him a cup of coffee, black.

Christine (Stacy Edwards) is a pretty girl in her twenties, a lightning fast typist in the secretarial pool. She's very nice and caring. Problem is she's deaf and talks funny. Chad spots her and decides she is perfect for this little game of broken hearts he wants to play with Howard (Matt Malloy), his slightly nerdy friend, co-worker and sometime boss. We'll both date her, he says, and then dump her. That way we'll get back at all the women who have done us dirt. He has an ulterior motive as well. He wants to destroy Howard, just to prove he can.

What makes this film work is the sheer brutality of Chad's bloodless methods, and Director Neil LaBute's suffocating depiction of predatory life in the corporate structure. LaBute, who also wrote the script, is uncompromising in his desire to make us see that people are animals. He succeeds.

The moral of this story is NOT Nice Guys Finish Last, or All Men Are Pigs, but KNOW THYSELF. The world is filled with human jellies who don't know who they are or what they want, who allow their actions to be directed by the rules of others. Hence, Howard crumbles while Christine, well-grounded in her personality, apparently bounces back.

If you've come this far, you already know the essence of the plot. What most viewers miss is that Howard has a chance to live on his own terms, and he goofs because of a misguided need for male bonding. As a "nerd", he just has to "carry Chad's sweater". At one point he's at a fork in the road: he is given the benefit of an outsider's perspective, but he takes the wrong path. A colleague, who, not coincidentally, is black, says, on learning that Howard is dating the deaf girl, "You're a bigger man than I am." He explains that such a bold variation is dangerous in their corporate culture! Howard is taken aback at the man's admiration of his daring; this new perspective astonishes him. It doesn't sink in, though. He has a chance to be a real man, and he misses it through his own brand of deafness to the "invisible man" (who has just paid him the compliment of confiding in him and assuming that he's not a shark).

There is a subtle implication at the end that Chad may indeed get what's coming to him. His live-in girlfriend has the upper hand emotionally; he explicitly asks her for love.